Ever since Reagan there has been this incessant cry about business this and business that. Business needs less regulation, less government interference. Business provides more benefits to more people if we just let the force of the market dictate which businesses shall succeed and which shall fail.
By and large I tend to agree with this sentiment, or at least I used to. The problem with this is that businesses are amoral. They aren't a church, or a court, they are organizations devoted to making money, presumably doing things more efficiently than people could do for themselves. Because they are more efficient they can charge a price that people will find it easier to pay than to do the work themselves.
Because businesses fundamentally don't care about the world outside of their own operations, they may engage in practices that are detrimental to the society that hosts them. Witness out-sourcing and off-shoring, two practices that have put a lot of Americans out of work.
Then there was the economic meltdown caused by businesses running amuck. That probably did more damage to our economy than all other factors combined. This particular debacle got started when the regulations governing mortgages changed, and the worst part of it is that, much as I hate to say it, the change in loan regulations happened under Clinton.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
No big surprise. People are generally amoral. That's why we have police officers.
Regulators are supposed to be police officers, too. They're supposed to keep everyone honest and the playing field level. When that happens, you get an equal opportunity for earned prosperity.
The problem is when the politicians get involved and bend the rules for financial gain or because they're stupid. And that goes for both parties.
Post a Comment